30.6.09

PRO CHALLENGE SERIES LAUNCHED

The WPBSA has today announced a new Pro Challenge Series of seven tournaments - open to anyone on the main tour - designed to give the players more playing opportunities.

This is good news. Players have justifiably complained that they are left twiddling their thumbs for long periods between tournaments.

If they don’t play in these new events then these complaints become less valid.

I would have preferred the new series to carry ranking status at a lower points tariff than the major events – as I suggested last January – because this would encourage participation from the better known players and thus increase their credibility and the publicity around them.

Now for the controversy: four of these tournaments are played under the standard rules. The other three are using only six reds.

I can’t help thinking it would be better to be one or the other: either the whole thing done properly or the whole thing done as ‘Super Sixes’ if this experiment really must be continued.

However, it was apparently players – Dave Harold and Michael Holt included – who helped come up with the format.

The bottom line is this: more tournaments is A Good Thing. OK, so they presumably won’t be televised but there is scope for internet streaming and anything that creates the impression there is something happening in the game should be applauded.

One of snooker’s problems is that it has ‘fallen under the radar’ of late because of the gaps between tournaments.

Those gaps are gradually being plugged: by the Championship League, the World Series and now this new Pro Challenge Series.

There is also reasonable money available - £5,000 for the winners of the 15 red tournaments and £3,000 for the winners of the 6 reds events.

If that doesn’t sound much to you then it’s more than you’d get for being in the club practising.

There isn’t sufficient money in snooker’s coffers at the moment to put on another three or four major ranking events.

But the new Pro Challenge Series at least means players will be able to do what they are supposed to do: play snooker.

Well it's more snooker and it's not ranking. Some opportunity for the players to play competitive snooker, yet more relaxed and maybe we will now see some of the elusive "characters" emerge ... Also an opportunity to bring (back) snooker to venues where there was none until now or not in recent years. And they are short events hopefully. I just find it a pity they haven't organised that over extended week-ends instead of working days. They should have got more audience, especially more young audience.

Will be very interesting to see what other venues they decide to use. I would suggest Pontins, Leeds and the Academy in Sheffield are the only ones with tables decent enough to host professional snooker events.

Does anybody agree with me that WSA have had just another knee jerk reaction to try to stop other Tournaments like World Series & League snooker from becoming more successful?I cannot believe that professional players would be interested in these comps with the prize money on offer - it's virtually the same as the Ponins Pro-Ams.I do not think it is a very good reflection on WSA.

Maybe these events could attract local sponsors? Maybe the local butcher could put up, say, a week's family meat pack for the winner and a dozen pork chops for second. Or the local pub could put up a case of beer for the winner, a dozen cans for runner-up, 6 cans each for beaten semi finalists. We've got to start encouraging companies to sponsor events, no matter how small. When they see what a successful, worldwide product we have to offer they'll be glad they got involved.

its more snooker and for thoes that will criticise it there was this type of thing happening in the early 90s that at that time carried some ranking points far less than the Ranking Tournaments but it was a good idea....

however drop this super sixes s*** its been tryed in the World Series and i found it as boring as hell....

i prefered it when the full 15 reds was on the table and it increased the excitement of the frames...

This is probably just a test to see how popular the events are. I would assume next season the 15 red tournaments will carry limited ranking points and if the 6 red events are popular they will progress into bigger spectacles

I've heard from a good source that these new 'events' are there to sweeten the blow of some cancelled ranking events next season.

The BBC is under massive pressure internally to justify where it is spending our cash, and there have been rumblings that they are likely to cut back on their coverage of events in a troubled sport like snooker.

The main problem many senior execs see is that it's just the BBC who are keeping the sport afloat. The lack of sponsors is of course not a concern for the BBC, but the demands placed on them by the WSA as their only serious source of revenue (Betfred apart) is making for an increasingly tense stand-off.

What professional snooker players want from their Association is a minimum of 8 ranking comps in a season with decent prize money so they are able to make a living - even down to the 96.I do not know what the WSA and the commercial arm of WSA do for their money that they are paid out of the players funds.I am certain that if Germany, Belgium or Russia were approached in the correct manner a sponsored ranking event would be possible. Even if WSA had to subsidise the event at the outset, with the correct marketing & sales I'm sure it would show a profit.What are they keeping the huge reserve for - the next court case?We have been hearing for at least 3 years now that the WSA are "in talks" with regard to more events and now there are rumours of LESS events. They are obviously talking to the wrong people!!What do these people do for their money and how do the players let them get away with it??I'm sure Rodney Walker did his relationship with the BBC no good by not appearing on their recent programme - too busy at a dinner to even take a phone call!!The sooner the players with the clout take responsibility and control the better.Val O'Neill

I sincerely hope this six reds concept doesn't catch on. The break building, the centuries....(and the elusive maximum). That's too big a part of the game to scrap. And again: let snooker flourish in mainland Europe, oust mr. Walker and we can lay these rubbish "snooker is dead" prophecies permanently to rest.

come on people -here are the facts:snooker is suffering commercially cos of a lack of sponsorship. I say "commercially" cos in terms of the actual sport itself -we all know that the standard of play is clearly higher than ever.Fact: snooker dosen't have enough sponsorship money at the moFact: we are in an economic melt down and companies don't wanna spend their money on sportFact: WSA are under pressure to improve things without anyone giving them the money to do itFact: they are doing what they've been asked to do -hold more tournamentsQuestion -what else can they do?

it has been complacent over many years that has affected the comercial aspect of snooker.

instead of waiting for the governement to ban tabaco sponsorship as a governing body they should have droped tabacco not tobacco being withdrawn that way the sport holds the aces instead of looking desparate.

10:23pm "Fact: we are in an economic melt down and companies don't wanna spend their money on sport"

Wrong, most companies don't want to spend money on snooker, i agree with you as you say we are in an economic meltdown , but ask yourself why is it sponsor's dont want to come to snooker, most other sport's are coping well in this meltdown, look at this week's wimbledon tennis, whoever wins either mens or women's will pick up a staggering £850,000, golf, darts, cricket, many other sport's don't have problem's getting sponsor's so why is it just snooker.

It's funny how this blog and Selby's blog were comparing tennis to snooker only last week with regard to snooker getting more TV viewers. Yet two nights ago 11.8m UK viewers watched Murray's 4th round match at Wimbledon. When was the last time our sport had nearly 12m watching a last 16 match?

And how do you know snooker is more popular in Britain for 50 weeks of the year? Maybe you could ask at one of the 2700+ tennis clubs in the UK to see what they think? Stupid statements like that just make us all look stupid.

You'll find that Sky and Eurosport show far more tennis throughout the year than snooker. They wouldn't show these sports if there wasn't an audience for them. After all, Sky used to cover ranking events, but now only show the Premier League.

It may be that World Snooker are mixing the 6 reds and 15 reds for a season to moniter the interest/entries etc, it seems sensible to try it out first rather than throwing ranking points at it in its first year. If the feedback is positive they may, if conditions are right, allocate ranking points and ditch the 6 reds. Lets give it a chance and stop knocking it.

Your right Dave, it's not comparing like with like - but then, comparing what people watch on a cold Sunday night in January (a snooker 'major'), to who's watching TV on a hot sunny Saturday afternoon in June (lowest ranking ATP event) is not comparing like with like either.

And as for Selby saying that Murray's final at Queen's got less viewers than the World Championships (he did not specify what session or match), that's not comparing like with like either.

Comparing the World Champs to Wimbledon, that's starting to get a more balanced comparison, but I agree 100% with anon @ 1:14pm, it's "futile, people usualy only do it to have a dig at another sport or body, (and) it helps to make their point seem credible."

but Tennis in this country pins theire hope on Andy Murray similar to Snooker is viewed in China with Ding.

consistantly Snooker has higher viewing figures than Tennis however the chances of a brit not winning a snooker tournament is extreamly small therefore it dont get the media wimbledon gets for that reason.

go to china and you will see the similarities surounding murray here with the pressure Ding is under.

Murray is the USP for the BBC at Wimbledon: most of the country are supporting the same guy, just as they would be supporting the same team in the World Cup. Hence, they clear the BBC1 evening schedule to show his match.

Snooker's problem is that there are too many Brits and not enough players from overseas.

sorry but you are being brain washed by what you read in the press whitch is not acurate by a long chalk.

nothing is as popular as it was in the 80s because TV has changed.

negative coments in the press and on forums are harming the sport so that people arent going to tournaments as they was coupled that with the fact the Wembly Arena has a dead atmosphere where as the conference centre was electrick..

thats why im against moving the world championship from the crucible to a larger venue .if they get the venue wrong the heart of the championship will be riped open.

when they moved the UK From preston that was also a mistake and that tournament suport has been afected.

"ive had Darts rammed down my throat constantly and with respect that is nowhere near as popular as snooker is as a spectacle or the afection of people."

It doesn't matter which is the most popular. Darts went through a split in the 90's that should have killed it yet come out stronger. It is a much better organised sport than Snooker is. The Snooker Tour structure is 30 years out of date with just 6/8 events, no smaller Ranking events for lower ranked players to get experience away from Prestatyn Qualifiers and to give the top players regular snooker, a ranking list thats updated just once a year, no events in Mainland Europe and no attempts at making the Chinese events as big as the UK Championship or Grand Prix. There is no other professional sport organised in the way snooker is.

It is almost impossible to have like for like comparisons in sport, football, tennis, rugby, snooker, golf and darts thankfully all have a different fan base, people who put big money into golf or motor sports for example wouldn't get involved with darts or snooker the demographics don't fit and it wouldn't suit their image, this is well known in the market place.

Having a go at any sports association from afar without the full facts is easy, it amazes me that so many people think that they have the answers. Snooker is a great sport and has a good TV audience but that doesn't mean its commercially attractive in the market place. its obvious sponsors are not lining up waiting for a piece of the snooker action, if they were all the tournaments would be sponsored.

Snooker has over the years tried many different approaches to attract sponsorship with many sporting agencies and auntraprunurial individuals (so I'm told, I have no reason to doubt it) with varying degrees of success, I don't think there is someone out there with a magic wand, but that doesn't mean snooker should stop trying.

10:44pm where have you been the last 15 years, the pdc broke away from the bdo and took all the best player's with it. There is 2 world champion's yes but everyone know's who the real one is, it's Phil the Power Taylor 14 times champion of the world. Martyn Adams the bdo world champion will not play Taylor, even if it was a charity event. Maybe snooker need's to do a breakaway from the wsa, it surely can't get any worse than it is at the moment, even if we do end up with 2 world champions.

Darts seem to be talked about more on this blog than snooker, is it taking over the blog? Stop compering please its played out, the posts that said compering sports is "futile" i.e.(waste of time) seems to have been ignored. Mmmm ....I wonder why.